eleison

2 hours ago, Laurier said:

I would not be surprised if those are true , that would make a lot of sense so they can both bring a high spec product and protect/replace their FS range.
But the setup is going to end up between 5-10k and have a very different form factor, I imagine something a bit like a  kinefinity terra system.

I planned to wait for the a7siii, but I just ordered a A7iii + ninja V and will sell my a7rii.
To be honest I did DP/post produced some projects on both red and blackmagic 4.6k and  unless you really need the slow mo it s hard to justify the cost/size factor compared to the recent sony cameras. 

Sony's plan has worked.  When the a7siii finally comes out, sony thinks it will be good enough to make you, once again, "upgrade".  I think that is why we offically haven't heard of the a7siii yet -- sony wants people to buy the a7iii first; and then ultimately the a7siii.  If they bring out the a7siii too soon, a lot of video people would skip the a7iii.  Sneaky sony... But I'm not going to buy the a7iii.  I know their game plan, but it sure is hard resisting :-)

2 hours ago, salim said:

It's probably too late now, you probably burned a lot of bridges and scared off more future marketing people.

IMHO, at this point, maybe your next option is to brand yourself as the ultimate critical reviewer. Basically the place people come to be warned and  see everything they should know about before buying a product. The kind of critical review they do not get on youtube affiliate-marketing driven review business or elsewhere. So market the reason you are not invited is because your reviews are too honest, "too honest to be invited". 

Hope this is constructive.  

Andrew is an iconoclast.  But iconoclast never get the sacramental wine or bread...  T's the way of the world.  As long as he keeps his reviews honest, then let the world burn.  If he starts dinging a camera because he wasn't invited to x, or y event than he will be "just the same as everyone else"....

The more truthful you are, the more companies don't want to invite you to their press releases, product reveals, etc.  The more servile you are, the more companies want to invite you so you can write fluffy pieces about their products.  It's part of the biz.  Just look at Tony and Chealse.  Every time a companies gives them early access to their products (e.g., Nikon); the next day, their reviews and youtube videos are "less harsh" about the companies products - "Oh, the Nikon Z doesn't have dual cards.  That's fine... ", while just a few weeks ago they are saying camera's without dual cards are basically a liability.  They walk the tightrope and to be honest I don't fully trust their reviews.  But that's how they make their living...

2 hours ago, LORDD said:

 

And while people talk about cameras and more cameras, they stop recording and doing work, while others with cameras from 5 years ago, do amazing jobs.

Stop it... Just stop it... I get it.  You think we are obsessive about gear and instead we should start filming... Well, that might be true, but it doesn't stop the fact that there maybe issues with the blackmagic camera.  This is why we are on this forum.  Hell, do you think I would even touch this forum if I wanted to be 100% productive?  It's like telling fat people, "you know, that cake has 1000 calories".  Fat people already know.. We already know we are obsessive..  If I wanted to be productive, I would have went to some website called, "Get the hell out of the internet, and use your freaking camera that you bought months ago, asswipe".com... Do you see me going to that website right now?  Nope.... QED.  Now, excuse me while I create my indy flim... but first, I need to research for the best camera... :-)

25 minutes ago, OliKMIA said:

Here it is: small, lightweight and affordable

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1399823-REG/canon_3042c002_eos_c700_full_frame.html

Huhm, when people think of mirrorless, they think small dslr form factor (or range finder form factor).  This is basically a camcorder just re-branded as mirrorless.  Hell, with this line of thinking, canon could have rebranded their old XL1 as "mirrorless" too, right?

22 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

The problem is Nikon doesn't have much unique to Nikon that they can bring to the mirrorless market.

....

.....

It takes time to build an eco-system with third party companies making Speed Boosters and Smart-EF adapters, such-like. Another reason it's probably going to be better to wait until the 3rd or 4th model.

 

If nobody buys into the first generation Nikon mirrorless, I don't think the company has that many resources to create a 3rd or 4th model.  Nikon (from all the rumors) are hurting quite a bit since they do not have anything else to sell except for cameras.  Canon has sensors, security equipment, printers, etc...  Sony has video games, radios, etc...

The place Nikon is at is precarious.  The company is at the edge of the cliff looking down into the abyss. I wouldn't want to be them.  Nikon needs to do something miraculous with their up and coming mirror-less camera or else they are done.

6 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

You are hyped about something, I see. I would call that exitement.:) Easy task, no need for a speedbooster here.

The only thing I'm hyped about is the thought of not spending another $2-4 grand on a new camera this year.  The gh5s doesn't fill my main use cases.  I have an a7sii and the biggest thing I'm missing is PDAF.  The gh5s does not have that, and there is no conclusive evidence that it is better in low light/extreme low light than the a7sii.

I am also not excited about the a7sIII.  I was for a while, but I need a camera to have unlimited recording (theatre plays, recitals, etc. last more than 30mins).  The upcoming a7siii will probably not be hackable for a while since it does not have the sony playmemories app.  So yeah..  I'm hyped that I'm not going to be spending $2-4k  on a camera this yeah.  But to be honest, I have G.A.S. so I'm a bit sad at the same time.  hahahahah

6 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

f8 plus 25k would be the same as f4 plus 6400 light gathering and dof wise, putting the GH5s into an advantage for a CINEMATIC image, A7s showing nasty artefacts, GH5s absent of any of these nasties.

If you say so...  I want to see evidence though.  Make the gh5s fullframe by putting a speed booster on the gh5s (same DOF, same focal length, same perspective, etc.) and compare.  Lets see who has the better image.  Let the battle begin.  Otherwise, it's all hype to me right now.   F8 in a dim highschool gym... we are starting to talk about really high ISO...  especially if you are doing slow mo (120fps)....  Not to mention all the situations that documentary videographers encounter all the time (alley ways in the mid of the night???).  If I'm wrong, I'll admit it.  I use to have a gh2 and I used a gh4 for a bit.  I loved the gh2.

5 minutes ago, JordanWright said:

How often do people even shoot that high? since switching from the A7s ii to the GH5 I've only had to go up to 3200 anyway... maybe its just the sort of things that I shoot

Different strokes for different folks.. "F8 and be there" -- having 25K+ iso helps especially for documentary people (or folks that run and gun, video taping their kids in a lightly light room; the, "'F+ck it, right now I don't know what or who to focus on; someone or something is bound to do something interesting in this wresting meet; I'll set the fstop as high as I can so I can get the most dof and see what I can capture"  hahahahahaha  Life comes at you fast when you have kids so keep everything in focus :-).

24 minutes ago, JordanWright said:

GH5s + SB XL gets you pretty close to full frame equivilant 

Yes, and compare that combination to an A7Sii.  I'm expecting the Sony to spank the GH5s.  GH5s is trying to compete in a niche that the A7S dominates in.  I don't think this is a good strategy since I doubt the GH5s "can see in the dark" like the Sony.  The GH5s is probably a good camera OVERALL, but It's probably not the A7S killer that Panasonic is marketing the camera to be.

2 things that really hurt:

1) no IBIS

2) no PDAF

... but, it's good in low light.. not the greatest.. but good...  Just my opinion.  The best thing about the sony a7sii for me is that I can "f8 and be there" almost in all lighting situations.  I'm not a professional videographer, I just like to take videos of my kids, and family :-)  I love that quality of the a7sii.  That almost negates the Sony not having PDAF.. hahahahahah. 

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

@eleison Age has nothing to do with the perception of culture. Age can be an advantage if one have spend his years (semi-)wisely because has better knowledge and understanding of cultural trends through history, so can compare, and excercise his hard-acquired criticial judgement. 

Junk is just junk, you just have a whole junkyard on your screen right now. Through history there was (and is) a lot of garbage produced, we just tend to forget that for every masterpiece ever written, were billions of useless pages (or paper, or papyrous, or clay) of npt important stuff. 

Obviously this is going to lead somewhere, but current productions are just not very important right now, content wise. Time is a limited comodity, especially in this time in history, and watching a Jackass influenced video by a jackass (and I do not mean the animal) doesn't make it the future, and doesn't make worth watching, usually.

In the time one needs to read "The Kentucky Dervy is Decadent and Depraved" can watch a  couple Casey Neistat videos. I know what I would choose.

“Time you enjoy wasting is not wasted."  If watching Paul Logan or case Neistat videos float their boats, I'm not going to complain.  Junk in one era, can considered to be a master piece in another.  Wasn't Shakespeare considered mass produced tripe of it's time?  Or the common camber pot of a long bygone time, now considered precious and put in museums?  Or earlier comic books that were considered trash only to be read by deviant teenagers in the heat of puberty, now considered great arts of works worth thousands of dollars?

Heck, how many people on this forum spend inordinate amount of time comparing specs on camera gear without actually filming and creating stuff of value?  Is it really a waste of time?  Probably, but if we enjoy it, then ultimately it's not.  Besides, I'm too old to care if something is a waste of time or not.  Life is too short.  Enjoy yourself and let other people figure out what is important to them.

17 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@eleison God eleison imas! Have you even read Hunter S. Thompson?! PiewPieDie is his equivalent in vlogging world?

"Eyewitness to history" by John Carey is a great reportage book -from Greco-Roman culture to the 80's, I didn't see any resemblance with any vloger I ever watched.

hahahahaahha... If I am not too bold to say, but have you considered that you maybe just too old to understand this new generation. Older people never understand the new stuff.  For example, music tastes changes.  Compare the early 1900's music to the late 1900's music.  They are all music, but there will always be some curmudgeon that states "Music???  Music!!! you call that Music... In my time, music was Mozarts, Chopin, Beethoven, etc... Now a days, what people listen to is not MUSIC, but TRASH!!!  Now get off my lawn, wippersnapper!!!"

When Hunter S. Thompson was alive, the previous generation also did not consider what he did as "real" reporting.  Oh, how the times have changed.  This current generation (like the previous generation) does not to be told what is  real reporting.  They don't need to read a book to know what they feel keeps them updated, keeps them informed, entertained and keeps them feeling connected to society.   These are the things that reporting does.  Different generation, different tools, but the same end results.

The GH2 is a classic.  It marked the point where the camera no longer really mattered; the story mattered more.  A lot of good content was created on the GH2 because it was the first real good camera that creative people could use to show off their stories and ideas.  It was the pinnacle for it's time.  Now people have moved on and there are so many good cameras; no one camera can really claim to have a monopoly on being a good camera that creative people flock too.  That time has passed.  Yes, more casual people have also moved into the film making field diluting all the good content that is out there. 

p.s., there are a lot more "gorgeous footage" from modern cameras like the gh5 than the gh2.  The quality of the footage is better - 4k, dynamic range, color balance, etc.  But a lot of the older gh2 footage had better content - better story; better editing, etc...  If you look at almost all GH2 content, they are technically worse than the new stuff; but obviously not too much worse -- the failings did not detract from the story.  GH2 content was so much better.

Vloggers, youtubers, etc. are this generations Lois Lane, Hunter Thompsons, Morley Safer, etc.  Vlogger, youtubers, are this generations news reporters, war correspondences, magazine opinion pieces, etc...   Just like their "dead tree media" counterparts, it's all about getting the "story" -- no matter how, boring, gruesome, etc.  Keep the camera on and pointed to the action... or dead body.  Get the story no matter what.  Stay with the troop while there is a gun fight all around while being pinned down by Charle while helicopters are circling around.  At no point in history has there been so much "reporting"; so much knowledge, and experiences shared to so many people.  Everyone can now potentially be a reporter.  Because of this, there is a lot more content. 

If people don't want to listen, don't want to read, don't want to see things that may offend them..... they can always turn off the TV, close the magazine cover, don't buy the newspaper -- OR in this generations vernacular, don't click on the link.  Logan Paul didn't make 15/16 million people click on his video.  These people wanted to see Logan Pauls videos.  I don't click on Logan paul's video's because I'm not into his type of content.  Not my cup of tea.  I don't "invite" him into my "mind space" by not clicking on his stuff.  The video about some dead body.  Did I click on the link?  Nope.  I don't want to see/learn/know more about that type of stuff.  I only care about really important stuff... Like consumer cameras, codexs, 4k60p, etc.  You know, things that will feed my G.A.S.  Because without G.A.S., the internet would be a more boring place -- for me at least.  Dead bodies??? Japanese haunted forests??? Who cares about that sort of shiet!!!!

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

 @eleison, I take it you don't consider yourself a 'real' dp/director, but why is it that someone using a mirrorless camera can't be considered a serious filmmaker? If someone were to shoot the next Citizen Kane or Raging Bull on a GH5 or a6500, would they be any less deserving of the title of filmmaker?  Thomas Vinterberg’s 1998 film Festen (Celebration) , among the most powerful films in my experience, was shot on Hi-8 videotape; Wong Kar Wai's decidedly lo-fi Chungking Express was shot on film as far as I know, but could just as easily have been shot with any of today's prosumer cameras (with much better quality); Nicholas Winding Refn's brilliant crime trilogy Pusher, ditto; and there is no denying that the precocious Canadian filmmaker Xavier Dolan's I Killed My Mother and Lukas Moodysson's compelling drama Lilya 4-ever (shot on 16mm film), could just as well have been shot on one of today's mirrorless cameras. 

I would try to be a little less condescending toward filmmakers who choose to shoot with whatever they can afford.

I do not consider myself a "real" dp/director.  yes, it makes me sad to say that, but objectively I am not.  While there will be edge cases of "real" dp/directors using "inferior" equipment.  They are just that - edge cases.  if you look at a lot of film festivals now, you will see fewer prosumer cameras being used... and this trend is continuing.  Year after year. Less and Less prosumer cameras.  Unlike the glory days of the 5d/gh2 where your chooses were limited - you either used film, minidvs or the then, new prosumer dslrs; now we have  cameras that are better than prosumer cameras, but yet a lot cheaper than film.  Hell, do people remember trying to create shallow DOF???  back in the day, the quality was so bad, the 5d/gh2 had a place in professional film making.  Now, not as much.

On 11/20/2017 at 4:16 AM, IronFilm said:

Or you're just in your early years of your career. 
Or you're not a specialist / owner op in the camera department (maybe shooting is just a side thing, and you're usually a director/producer/whatever, then having a mirrorless camera to shoot with is a lot of sense).

Well.. if a person is at that level, can't it be debated that the person isn't a "real" dp/director yet?...  Remember if you are doing something as a side gig, what you are doing is more of a hobby;  you are not a dp/director.

In any case, just my opinion.....  People who are really serious about film making; I think they have moved on from prosumer cameras...  Obviously, prosumer cameras are a good starting point for people who don't really know if they want to go into film making -- but then, I don't think these people are really dp/directors.... yet :-)

Remember how cr*ppy video cameras use to be a mere 10 years ago for the indie crowd.  Those days, the cameras used miniDV tapes.  Hahahah.. You either had a huge budget using film or you basically were regulated to using miniDV based cameras.  Now there is a spectrum of choices with respect to equipment.  Also, if you look most of these people are not really using dslr/prosumer cameras like the A7s, gh5, etc...  Perhaps these productions might use the prosumer camera as a crash camera or something, but the marketplace has moved on. 

Times have definitely change.  10 years ago, you had a lot more professional productions using prosumer DSLR - gh2, 5d, etc.  Not anymore.  That gap has been filled by specialized camera like the c300, red dragon, varicam, etc...   If you are still obsessing about the quality of prosumer cameras, you have failed as a DP or a film maker.  That problem has been solved.  Just my opinion....

On 11/14/2017 at 11:28 AM, Don Kotlos said:

Here is the AF test in video:

 

PS He will be doing some video tests as well so if anyone wants to ask him for something specific here is the original thread: https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/4222635

There are still focusing jitters.  Look at the top left corner.  Focus on the edges of the roof.  It seems to me the camera is still focusing back and forth even when the subject is in focus AND the subject isn't moving just so that the camera can confirm that things are in focus.  Sometimes it's not as obvious because of the background blur.  If the DOF was increased a litte bit more, it would be more obvious.   I guess one way to mitigate the issue of the pulsing focusing of a contrast detection system is to have shallow depth of field.  Panasonic just needs to move to phase detection. 

On 9/4/2017 at 10:19 AM, Damphousse said:

In real estate you also want to go wide in you field of view.  Going from APS-C to m43 makes no sense if you are taking pictures of cramped interiors.  You would want to go to full frame and squeeze more real estate in with optics that distort less.  A cheap extremely low distortion 50mm lens is going to have a field of view of a 100mm lens on m43.  Once you start adding in things like speedboosters or wider and wider lenses distortion creeps in and is evident with all the straight lines in interiors.

Not saying you can't use something smaller than FF but physics is clearly on the side of FF.

The Panasonic 12-35 ii is expensive but the GH5 corrects the distortion in camera.  Could be a nice way to "cheat".

Tell us how it goes.  I think the a6500 would be a better fit if you plan on using natural lighting -- especially for the outdoor landscape videos of a house ("curb appeal", sunset shots, places where lighting cannot be controlled, etc... ???).  After all, the general consensus is that low light ability of the a6500 is very, very good (some people have even tried to compare it to the a7sii).  You will be able leverage that into getting a larger dof.  I think if you use a speed booster for the gh5, than it might be parity.. but then it's an extra cost and adds complexity... and perhaps, as mention above, there maybe lens distortion..

hahah, yeah I agree with damphousse, the best solution, IMHO is full frame...  Time is money and sometimes you just cannot wait for that perfect lighting (you have a schedule.. other houses to visit, etc.).  Take the video and leave.  You don't want to wait for when the sun is up or going to your car to get lights, setup lights, etc...

The enthusiastic camera market is following the same trajectory as the high-end audio market (https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/is-high-end-audio-dying-if-not-dead-already).

The only thing the camera market has against the cellphone behemoth is "physics".  You can only get so much quality from a tiny, weeny, image sensor on a cell phone camera.  If I take a picture in a bar/pub, the difference between a cell and camera is noticeable - even to an ordinary, random person who has no interest in cameras.  However, once cell phones are as good as cameras in that low light environment, say good bye to the enthusiastic camera market as we know it.  I'm not sure if cell phone sensors WILL ever get that good in our lifetimes, but technology does move very fast.  I'm not counting out the possibility.  The cell phone can already create a shallow DOF effect that is good enough for most people.

No doubt though, cameras will be more niche....  less and less mainstream as the years go by... and MORE EXPENSIVE (damn you SONY!!!).  To survive, camera manufactures will need to innovate.  150+ megapixel cameras (infinity zooming, and cropping :-), cameras that turn night time into day (like the a7s, but EVEN better).  500fps, etc... The use case for the regular camera person is almost satisfied by the cell phone.  New use cases must be created for those with deep pockets.  If no new use cases are found, than yes,the  enthusiastic camera market follow the high-end audio market with the same disastrous result. 

Actually, if you think about it. It wouldn't really be "disastrous".  Having most of our imaging and video needs met by a small device that we carried wherever we go.. that would be pretty cool. 

My wallet thanks canon for releasing another camera that I will not be buying.   Thank you!!!

I leave my a7sii and a6500 on my living room shelf.  It makes me more likely to use them.  I also only own small primes because "if I cannot stuff it down my pants" and walk away, I'm not going to be bring it along with me.

It's been working out pretty well.  Out of sight, out of mind.  In front of my ugly mug, and it's likely to come along for the ride.  I'm not a professional by any means of the imagination, but going light and small does help me with my creativity (it's hard to have any creativity when your camera is at home buried in the closet :-)

I hope sony doesn't continue increasing the size of their advanced, prosumer cameras (a7, a6000 series, etc..).  If they do, I will probably abandon them.

I remember carrying around a 7d and a 70-200mm lens.  No more.  Even for those who are in the biz.  Big cameras are intimidating and people get "stiff".  Big cameras are very limiting.. unless you have paid actors who's job is to be relaxed (or whatever the emotion they are paid big money  to emote) at the time.  Big marvel studios money, with big name actors --- sure, Red, ARrria, etc.. whatever..  Big name writers, with scripts written years in advanced.... Sure...

For most of the people on this forum, that's not us......  That is not our competitive advantage.  Ours is about the story, the creativity, etc.That is why "Upstream Color" did so well.  Quick and nimble... and CREATIVE :-)  Big camcorders/cameras are a hindrance to us.

On 4/23/2017 at 6:26 PM, DaveAltizer said:

I was just at the Sony press release and spoke to a Sony Rep. there was literally nothing interesting at the press release. I told the rep I was hoping for a Sony a9s and he asked me why? I told him it's because I want Slog and better video features. He then asked me "why why don't you just get an a7S II?" I said I want phase detect autofocus and the better battery. He then said "well you're going to have to wait a long time."

 

conclusion:

nothing new here. Looks like we will wait at least another 6 months before we see anything.

 

yeah, 6 months is about right.  A "long time" for Sony is measured in months unlike some other companies where a long time is measured in years :-) hahahahahah...  Yep, biggest issue for me with the A7sii is the autofusing...  and the limited 12mpixels for stills.  Increase it to about 18  and I will be content for a long time.

3 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

They should care, because those are people with top end gear and the ability to get a shot on the cheap - they're eating their jobs. Many organizations (at least here in the US) are using freelancers and whacking photo departments to cut costs (why pay salary/benefits when you can just shell out for a few images) amid sharply declining revenues. There are lots of ex-newspaper/magazine/TV broadcast shooters floating around with all the publications that have been shuttered and the crazy amounts of consolidation. Sports Illustrated canned its entire photo department a few years back. Ditto for most of ESPN's videographers. Fox Sports hires local stringers for its regional broadcasts. Many conflict zone photogs are freelancers. The supply far exceeds the demand. I'm speaking as an ex-journalist that started in the biz in 2001 and watched papers merge with TV stations and fire 75% of the staff, I've seen 2-3 stations share operations in the same market to save costs by shedding the overlap (most notably videographers) and so on. We used stringers/freelancers daily (most were ex-staffers) and I watched our newsroom shrink over the course of a decade to a shell of what it was when I started.

This camera is just a halo product.  Not many will be sold.  Sony probably knows this and just wanted to make the best photo journalist camera that they can.  

For now, my piggy bank is safe..... 

21 minutes ago, Arikhan said:

(Photo)journalists don't care about the unrealistic phantasy or parallel universe of "enthusiasts".

Doesn't matter.  Take out the "enthusiasts", and the company goes bankrupt.  Think about it, if canon only sold 1DX m2 and Nikon only sold D5.... Bye, Bye Canon.. Bye, Bye Nikon...  See you guys in Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

If canon or Nikon stopped selling their flag ship cameras (ak "halo camera"), they would STILL BE ABLE to survive selling their "enthusiasts" camera.  These expensive "halo" cameras are there for a reason.. The same reason why "halo" cars exists - to make the unwashed masses to want to buy the brand that is the "best", even if they can only afford the sony a6000, or the canon rebel (or whatever their low end camera is)...